header-logo header-logo

22 May 2026 / Mary Young
Issue: 8162 / Categories: Features , Profession , Artificial intelligence
printer mail-detail

When chatbots mislead

250385
© Getty images

Traditional principles of misrepresentation depend on human intention & agency. The rise of autonomous AI systems challenges both concepts in fundamental ways, writes Mary Young

  • As artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots and large language models increasingly provide information and advice, English law is being forced to consider who may be legally responsible when those outputs are false or misleading.

In January 2026 the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce launched a consultation on a legal statement it had prepared on liabilities for artificial intelligence (AI) harms, considering what rights of recourse someone harmed by AI might have, but also against whom those rights might be exercised.

This article considers misrepresentation, and how the laws of England and Wales might approach representations made by automatons such as large language models (LLMs) (for example ChatGPT) or AI chatbots.

For there to be an actionable misrepresentation, there must be a false statement made by party A (or their agent) which induces party B to enter into a contract. While there is a degree of anthropomorphism in relation

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise expands London secondaries team with addition of Mary Lavelle

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law welcomes ex-Irwin Mitchell team to launch Hestia Private Client

Carpmaels & Ransford—Christopher Stothers

Carpmaels & Ransford—Christopher Stothers

Heavyweight patent litigator will bolster Carpmaels Ransford’s rapidly growing Litigation team as firm marks its 250th anniversary

NEWS
Lawyers have welcomed plans to create specialist rape and serious sex offences courtrooms at every Crown Court
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
back-to-top-scroll